Now, I know this subject is going to controversial (it's been a long time since we had one in the CA Forum!) but I do hope that people will respect that my topic is not intended to be anti-Semitic, just pragmatic.
I watched with interest today that the (now 91) Polish guard accused of assisting the Nazi's with the death of thousands of Polish Jews during WW2 in gas chambers has been convicted and sentenced to 5 years in prison (subsequently suspended pending an appeal).
Near where I live in France is the place of the Nazi atrocity at Oradour-sur-Glane on 10th June 1944 where 642 innocent unarmed men women and children were massacred. The perpetrators of this horrible deed were the Waffen SS; in reality, a rag tag and bobtail of a unit from (broadly) the Alsace region who were actually mainly of French Origin conscripted into the German Army, rather than being born German (reminding us of the Alsace's chequered history), acting under orders from the German command.
These two parts of history are in some ways connected.
Remembering that the incident at Oradour was in the closing stages of the war, members of the Waffen SS responsible for the atrocity were hunted down by the new French Administration and brought to trial. At the trial, without going over a massive amount of detail, sentences were remitted because the perpetrators were French and deemed to be under the influence of the 3rd Reich - just acting under orders.
It seems a similar view has been taken by the German courts over 65 years later in the trial of this Polish guard (who would have been about 25 at the time of the incident).
The Jewish community is, as expected, under-whelmed (putting it mildly) by the German court's decision. I guess they expected him to be tied to a post and shot or hung by the neck.
France moved on decades ago. Oradour is testament to the atrocities of war (no matter where) and the crumbling remains of the village, preserved after all these years, is a poignant reminder of what we will do to each other in the interests of our furtherance of heritage and a desire to cleanse the world of those who do not respect our views.
Why can't the Jews move on?
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Nazi Trial in Germany
Sex God
GnV
agree about people moving on, however a crime is a crime and those without a 'statute of limitations' should be tried when/where possible.
re Oradour-sur-Glane, I agree that they way the village has been left 'as was' is a more lasting memorial than a statue or plaque to the atrocities of 'war'. That and the Canadian WW 1 memorial near Vimy, plus some of the WW 2 concentration/death camps, are haunting / thought provoking places for all, more should visit.
agree about people moving on, however a crime is a crime and those without a 'statute of limitations' should be tried when/where possible.
re Oradour-sur-Glane, I agree that they way the village has been left 'as was' is a more lasting memorial than a statue or plaque to the atrocities of 'war'. That and the Canadian WW 1 memorial near Vimy, plus some of the WW 2 concentration/death camps, are haunting / thought provoking places for all, more should visit.
I don't think anyone should "move on".
What happened in the camps should never be allowed to be forgotten, and anyone responsible should be brought to justice whenever possible.
The only way forward isn't to "move on" but to ensure that, if you do carry out mass murder, you will be found and punished.
What happened in the camps should never be allowed to be forgotten, and anyone responsible should be brought to justice whenever possible.
The only way forward isn't to "move on" but to ensure that, if you do carry out mass murder, you will be found and punished.
Quote by robbo-bi1
I don't think anyone should "move on".
What happened in the camps should never be allowed to be forgotten, and anyone responsible should be brought to justice whenever possible.
The only way forward isn't to "move on" but to ensure that, if you do carry out mass murder, you will be found and punished.
A (then) 25 year old squaddie who acted as a guard at the camp?
I doubt he had much influence over matters and was as much scared for his own life...
I can't help thinking about the atrocities which can be currently levelled at the Jewish community against their neighbours. Who will dare to bring them to justice?
Quote by HnS
That and the Canadian WW 1 memorial near Vimy, plus some of the WW 2 concentration/death camps, are haunting / thought provoking places for all, more should visit.
Yesterday I was at Cambrai,and had a few moments walking in a memorial graveyard there. It certainly is thought provoking.
Sex God
just cos you can't (for whatever reason) prosectute the 'big guns' doesn't mean you don't throw the book at the small fry. It was established in the post-war trials that 'I was just following orders' is never a defence.
Ignorance is certainly no defence in this case; threat of death if you don't comply might just about scrape in - but should it? To take part in or facilitate mass torture or death rather than stand up against it or run away on a dark night? I don't know what I would be capable of in the circumstances, but I would not feel able to try to defend myself if I chose the safe choice.
Where perpetrators are still living, prosecution is fair enough. Once all are gone - along with (presumably) the surviving victims - then it is time for the rest of both groups to move on. The children of the victims should never visit punishment on the children of the perpetrators. Modern Germans are no more responsible for the Holocaust than I am for the hundreds of Jews that were tragically murdered in York in the Middle Ages.
Ignorance is certainly no defence in this case; threat of death if you don't comply might just about scrape in - but should it? To take part in or facilitate mass torture or death rather than stand up against it or run away on a dark night? I don't know what I would be capable of in the circumstances, but I would not feel able to try to defend myself if I chose the safe choice.
Where perpetrators are still living, prosecution is fair enough. Once all are gone - along with (presumably) the surviving victims - then it is time for the rest of both groups to move on. The children of the victims should never visit punishment on the children of the perpetrators. Modern Germans are no more responsible for the Holocaust than I am for the hundreds of Jews that were tragically murdered in York in the Middle Ages.
Sex God
Difficult GnV.
John Demjanjuk is apparently a Ukrainian ((( Not Polish. Tut GnV! :P ))) Red Army soldier taken as a P.O.W. during the German invasion of Russia in 1942, who was subsequently put to work in the camps. The prosecution has not presented evidence that he was guilty of any specific crime. Instead, they have argued that his mere presence at / role within the camp ((( Sobibor I think? ))) is sufficient to charge him as an accessory to mass murder, given that he knew he was leading people to their deaths, and helped clear the bodies out afterwards. In that respect it would be easy to argue that he was coerced and did what was necessary as a prisoner to survive, much like the Jewish Kapos serving in those same death camps, some of who ((( whom?
))) also committed acts of brutality against their own people, and properly on occasion wielded the power of life or death to an extent, very few of them ((( One? ))) ever being prosecuted in an Israeli court for doing so AFAIK. The desire for 'justice' does seem to be somewhat partial at times, IMO?
Dunno if there's more to this than I've read in the papers, but I can imagine a very stark choice. I could either a) do what I was required to do, knowing that I was marching people down to the death chambers, and I would alive at the end of it, or b) refuse to do what I was required to do, knowing that someone else would march those very same people down to the death chambers anyway, but I would be dead. The choice I made there would not save a single human life, but would cost me mine. I do not envy those who have been faced with that choice and lived to tell the tale, nor do I feel a need to punish a 91 year old for choosing to survive. I suspect I'd feel differently if I'd lost 2 or 3 generations of my family in Sobibor, but a desire for vengeance in this case doesn't seem to be all that rational?
N x x x ;)
John Demjanjuk is apparently a Ukrainian ((( Not Polish. Tut GnV! :P ))) Red Army soldier taken as a P.O.W. during the German invasion of Russia in 1942, who was subsequently put to work in the camps. The prosecution has not presented evidence that he was guilty of any specific crime. Instead, they have argued that his mere presence at / role within the camp ((( Sobibor I think? ))) is sufficient to charge him as an accessory to mass murder, given that he knew he was leading people to their deaths, and helped clear the bodies out afterwards. In that respect it would be easy to argue that he was coerced and did what was necessary as a prisoner to survive, much like the Jewish Kapos serving in those same death camps, some of who ((( whom?
))) also committed acts of brutality against their own people, and properly on occasion wielded the power of life or death to an extent, very few of them ((( One? ))) ever being prosecuted in an Israeli court for doing so AFAIK. The desire for 'justice' does seem to be somewhat partial at times, IMO?Dunno if there's more to this than I've read in the papers, but I can imagine a very stark choice. I could either a) do what I was required to do, knowing that I was marching people down to the death chambers, and I would alive at the end of it, or b) refuse to do what I was required to do, knowing that someone else would march those very same people down to the death chambers anyway, but I would be dead. The choice I made there would not save a single human life, but would cost me mine. I do not envy those who have been faced with that choice and lived to tell the tale, nor do I feel a need to punish a 91 year old for choosing to survive. I suspect I'd feel differently if I'd lost 2 or 3 generations of my family in Sobibor, but a desire for vengeance in this case doesn't seem to be all that rational?
N x x x ;)
Quote by neilinleeds
snip...
Dunno if there's more to this than I've read in the papers, but I can imagine a very stark choice. I could either a) do what I was required to do, knowing that I was marching people down to the death chambers, and I would alive at the end of it, or b) refuse to do what I was required to do, knowing that someone else would march those very same people down to the death chambers anyway, but I would be dead. The choice I made there would not save a single human life, but would cost me mine. I do not envy those who have been faced with that choice and lived to tell the tale, nor do I feel a need to punish a 91 year old for choosing to survive. I suspect I'd feel differently if I'd lost 2 or 3 generations of my family in Sobibor, but a desire for vengeance in this case doesn't seem to be all that rational?
N x x x ;)
Thanks for the correction neil. I think I got the underlying principles right.
Your take on the stark choices is bang on the money :thumbup:
They should leave this poor man now in peace. He's lived his life with the terror of those moments ever present I guess. But the Jews are a serial victim and forever seek vengeance.
I wholeheartedly agree with the sentiment that the horror of war should never be forgotten but persecuting a 91 year old victim - because he is much a victim as anyone else was - lacks rationale.
Quote by GnV
Remembering that the incident at Oradour was in the closing stages of the war, members of the Waffen SS responsible for the atrocity were hunted down by the new French Administration and brought to trial. At the trial, without going over a massive amount of detail, sentences were remitted because the perpetrators were French and deemed to be under the influence of the 3rd Reich - just acting under orders.
It seems a similar view has been taken by the German courts over 65 years later in the trial of this Polish guard (who would have been about 25 at the time of the incident).
The Jewish community is, as expected, under-whelmed (putting it mildly) by the German court's decision. I guess they expected him to be tied to a post and shot or hung by the neck.
France moved on decades ago. Oradour is testament to the atrocities of war (no matter where) and the crumbling remains of the village, preserved after all these years, is a poignant reminder of what we will do to each other in the interests of our furtherance of heritage and a desire to cleanse the world of those who do not respect our views.
Why can't the Jews move on?
Seems noble of the French to move on and just say the Jews are just sour about it after all these years.
Unfortunately it is just bollox. The French never got over it. They had a bloodlust for revenge but their requests to extridite the perpetrators from the British sector of post war Germany wasn't allowed. So they went to the Germans and they wouldn't allow it. So the French weren't that forgiving, and if they believed they could secure extridition now they still would.
As for the Jews not moving on. Is the trial in Isreal? Or Germany?
Dave_Notts
Quote by GnV
So, what are you saying Dave? That this man should be punished, just because the Jewish Israelites say so?
If he is being tried in Germany then it is the German authorities that are trying him. Not the Jewish Isrealites. They are witnesses if the are being questioned in court.
So your original statement is wrong. It should read "Why can't the Germans move on?"
I am adding "Why can't the French move on?" They even put up a plaque at the spot you mentioned to commenrate the massacre, even though they spelt the perpetrators name wrong and got his rank wrong. In '53 their ruling was to hang a German in absentia for ordering it but the plaque does not mention him. Did they get it wrong in their bloodlust to just get someone?
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
So, what are you saying Dave? That this man should be punished, just because the Jewish Israelites say so?
If he is being tried in Germany then it is the German authorities that are trying him. Not the Jewish Isrealites. They are witnesses if the are being questioned in court.
So your original statement is wrong. It should read "Why can't the Germans move on?"
I am adding "Why can't the French move on?" They even put up a plaque at the spot you mentioned to commenrate the massacre, even though they spelt the perpetrators name wrong and got his rank wrong. In '53 their ruling was to hang a German in absentia for ordering it but the plaque does not mention him. Did they get it wrong in their bloodlust to just get someone?
Dave_Notts
There are many stories about this incident and who was responsible for what. Sadly, most if not all of the people who knew for certain died on that awful day. The survivors did so under a pile of burning and smouldering bodies as the Waffen SS tried to cover up their mess.
The Waffen commander, later, denied any knowledge of the incident and claimed insanity - or some such thing. The Courts ruled about the heritage of the Alsace born soldiers. Charles de Gaul became involved. He was more interested in getting his sworn enemy Marechal Petain. It took the new French Government many years before they rebuilt a new Oradour-sur-Glane (just across the road) and even longer to dedicate the site of the original village as a place of remembrance.
Quite interesting really about CdG; he was sentenced to death in absentia by Petain (or rather a military court under his jurisdiction) and when it came to disposing of Petain after the war for high treason, Petain's death penalty was commuted by CdG to life imprisonment. Hardly a bad example of the way France had moved on, to which I referred
As I say, the French have moved on. They depict this place as one of remembrance of the horrors of war and what evil men can do to each other. We should never forget the evil horrors of the Hitler Reich but France and Germany are no longer at war and are very close allies in the fight against the new terror.
Incidentally, I have visited Oradour three times now and nowhere have I seen the plaque at "the spot" of the massacre. There were many places where innocent people were killed in Oradour. Street corners, the village green, the garage amongst others and the most poignant, the Church where the woman and children were corralled and hand grenades tossed in through the open windows before it was set alight.
You should visit the place. It is an education.
Now, as you say, the trial we have been debating was held in Germany but can you not see the hand of the unforgiving Israelites on the Court gavel? Like the "hand of God" in the Maradona football incident, these people believe they have divine right to command whatever they will and if you deny them, it is punishable by death. Hell hath no fury like an Jew scorned. But you are right; the Germans should have just told the Jews to bugger off but they are just too liberal for their own good. The poor guy wouldn't have travelled well to Poland anyway (the scene of the alleged crime), even less to Israel and the last thing the Jews wanted was the accused to die before he came to trial and "justice" was meted out and an example made.
So, a good compromise in the end. Convict him then stick two fingers up to the Jews whilst the Germans allow him to continue his life awaiting an appeal - which will likely never happen.
Now, I know this subject is going to controversial (it's been a long time since we had one in the CA Forum!) but I do hope that people will respect that my topic is not intended to be anti-Semitic, just pragmatic.
I thought you didn't want this to turn anti-semitic. Not doing a very good job then
The Germans tried him, in their country, using German laws. Yep, of course I see the hand of the Jews on this
Dave_Notts
Quote by Dave__Notts
Now, I know this subject is going to controversial (it's been a long time since we had one in the CA Forum!) but I do hope that people will respect that my topic is not intended to be anti-Semitic, just pragmatic.
I thought you didn't want this to turn anti-semitic. Not doing a very good job then
The Germans tried him, in their country, using German laws. Yep, of course I see the hand of the Jews on this
Dave_Notts
It still isn't intended to be anti-semitic.. I vos just responding to ze kvestions...
Sex God
Dave, while I'm quite sure GnV can speak for himself, just thought I'd point out that GnV's reference to the Jews not moving on was related to the reaction to the sentence in Israel in some quarters? Not who was responsible for the trial.
As you were.
N x x x ;)
As you were.
N x x x ;)
Quote by neilinleeds
Dave, while I'm quite sure GnV can speak for himself, just thought I'd point out that GnV's reference to the Jews not moving on was related to the reaction to the sentence in Israel in some quarters? Not who was responsible for the trial.
As you were.
N x x x ;)
Ahhhhhh that makes more sense. Couldn't get my head around the Jews being blamed for a trial in Germany.
Just had a quick Google on this case and it was interesting to see that the Isrealite Jews acquited him.
Dave_Notts
Quote by GnV
Thanks again neil. That is what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. :thumbup:
I wish you would bloody tell it right then. It will stop me getting my knickers in a twist
I think you should have a direct line to NIL so he can proof-read your posts.
But then again..........it would stop the way that threads meander and new bits of knowledge appear. Thats why I like the forums
Dave_Notts
Sex God
Quote by Dave__Notts
Thanks again neil. That is what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. :thumbup:
I wish you would bloody tell it right then. It will stop me getting my knickers in a twist
I think you should have a direct line to NIL so he can proof-read your posts.
But then again..........it would stop the way that threads meander and new bits of knowledge appear. Thats why I like the forums
Dave_Notts
you might want to read slower dave as it seems everyone else got what gnv was writing
:lol2::lol2:
Quote by Lizaleanrob
Thanks again neil. That is what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. :thumbup:
I wish you would bloody tell it right then. It will stop me getting my knickers in a twist
I think you should have a direct line to NIL so he can proof-read your posts.
But then again..........it would stop the way that threads meander and new bits of knowledge appear. Thats why I like the forums
Dave_Notts
you might want to read slower dave as it seems everyone else got what gnv was writing
:lol2::lol2:
Can he read? :shock:
Quote by GnV
Thanks again neil. That is what I was trying to say in a roundabout way. :thumbup:
I wish you would bloody tell it right then. It will stop me getting my knickers in a twist
I think you should have a direct line to NIL so he can proof-read your posts.
But then again..........it would stop the way that threads meander and new bits of knowledge appear. Thats why I like the forums
Dave_Notts
you might want to read slower dave as it seems everyone else got what gnv was writing
:lol2::lol2:
Can he read? :shock:
Perfectly G. As I read that you "tried" to say what NIL said but didn't quite say it. Now NIL has explained what you tried to say then it makes sense.
Dave_Notts
Sex God
It's a skill Dave. :smug: Good at translating gibberish me though. I mean, I've read many of me own posts back over the years, and often had to try and work out WTF I was on about when I wrote 'em? 
N x x x ;)
N x x x ;)
Was a crime committed? It either was or it wasn't.
Does he have a defence? He either does or he doesn't.
It it in the public interest to prosecute? It either is or it isn't.
I believe the answer to all those questions is yes - and the place to test it is in the courts. I do believe it is wrong to excuse someone just because of their youth and they were following orders, however I believe it is equally wrong to pile upon one man, the whole wrongs of the entire war atrocities when the reality is he had just as much choice as the people who he assisted killing.
I am not passing it off as a simple matter, it clearly is not - but ultimately if we think a crime has been committed then it should be tried, if we do not believe a crime has been committed then what is the big problem, let's move on.
Ultimately of course he has committed a crime, I believe that most reasonable people would believe this, and it is not unreasonable that he should answer for it.
Does he have a defence? He either does or he doesn't.
It it in the public interest to prosecute? It either is or it isn't.
I believe the answer to all those questions is yes - and the place to test it is in the courts. I do believe it is wrong to excuse someone just because of their youth and they were following orders, however I believe it is equally wrong to pile upon one man, the whole wrongs of the entire war atrocities when the reality is he had just as much choice as the people who he assisted killing.
I am not passing it off as a simple matter, it clearly is not - but ultimately if we think a crime has been committed then it should be tried, if we do not believe a crime has been committed then what is the big problem, let's move on.
Ultimately of course he has committed a crime, I believe that most reasonable people would believe this, and it is not unreasonable that he should answer for it.
He has committed a crime, that is no doubt. That is what has been proved. Legislation is very good at proving absolutes.
Where a good judge comes into play is looking at the mitigating circumstances surrounding the actions that individual undertook at that time. The sentance will hopefully then reflect this. In this case he was found guilty but after looking at the mitigating circumstances he released him.
Justice was seen to be done in my view as an outsider and had not to endure the holocaust. Those that did endure may never be able to forgive or forget.
Dave_Notts
Where a good judge comes into play is looking at the mitigating circumstances surrounding the actions that individual undertook at that time. The sentance will hopefully then reflect this. In this case he was found guilty but after looking at the mitigating circumstances he released him.
Justice was seen to be done in my view as an outsider and had not to endure the holocaust. Those that did endure may never be able to forgive or forget.
Dave_Notts
